The Politics of Artists in War Zones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This volume explores the role contemporary art plays within conversations around war and imperialism, bringing together chapters from leading international contemporary artists, theorists and curators, alongside the voices of contemporary war artists through original edited interviews. What exactly is contemporary war art in the West today? The Politics of Artists in War Zones considers the place of contemporary war art in the 2020s, a whole generation after 9/11 and long past the ‘War on Terror’. It addresses newly-emerged contexts in which war is found: not only sites of contemporary conflicts such as Ukraine, Yemen and Syria, but everywhere in western culture, from social media to ‘culture’ wars. With interviews from official war artists working in the UK, the US and Australia, such as eX de Medici (Australia) and David Cotterrell (UK), as well as those working in post-colonial contexts, such as Baptist Coelho (India), the editors reflect on contemporary processes of memorialisation, the impact of British colonising in Australia and India, and its relation to historical conflicts. It focuses on three overlapping themes: firstly, the role of memory and amnesia in colonial contexts; secondly, the complex role of ‘official’ war art; and thirdly, questions of testimony and knowing in relation to alleged war crimes, torture and genocide. Richly illustrated, and featuring three substantial interview chapters, The Politics of Artists in War Zones is a hands-on exploration of the complexities and challenges faced by war artists that contextualises the tensions between the contemporary art world and the portrayal of war. It is essential reading for researchers of fine art, curatorial studies, museum studies, conflict studies and photojournalism. What exactly is contemporary war art today? Edited by Kit Messham-Muir, Uroš Čvoro and Monika Lukowska-Appel, Art in Conflict: The Politics of Artists in War Zones brings together chapters from leading international contemporary artists, theorists and curators, plus the voices of contemporary war artists through original edited interviews. Art in Conflict focuses on three overlapping themes dominating current western war art: firstly, the role of memory and amnesia in colonial contexts; secondly, the complex role of ‘official’ war art, a subgenre of contemporary war art peculiar to Australia, Canada and the UK, each with a century-long evolving tradition of official war art; and thirdly, questions of testimony and knowing in relation to alleged war crimes, torture and genocide. A strong undercurrent throughout Art in Conflict is western colonialism and military intervention, both historically and within living memory. This is particularly relevant to the Anglophone world, currently subject to the overdue widescale critique of violent Western colonising and re-colonising. Many chapters and interviews address the impact of British colonising in Australia, India and its relation to historical conflicts, and more recent expeditionary ventures with the US’s War on Terror. Art in Conflict includes chapters from leading contemporary artists, theorists and curators, Ana Carden-Coyne, Charles Green, Anthea Gunn and Laura Webster, Paul Lowe, Lisa Slade, Kit Messham-Muir and Uroš Čvoro, who discuss the war art of Tony Albert, Khadim Ali, John Akomfrah, Derek Eland, Lana Čmajčanin, Indigenous Australian Aṉangu artists, Gertrude Kearns, Mladen Miljanović, Michael Zavros and others. Uniquely, this book features three substantial interview chapters drawn from hours of conversation with some of the world’s leading contemporary practitioners and experts, including Abdul Abdullah, Alana Hunt, eX de Medici, (Australia), David Cotterrell, Andrew Sneddon (UK), Baptist Coelho (India), Todd Stone (US), Karen Bailey and Phillip Cheung (Canada), as well as eminent war historian Prof Joanna Bourke (Birkbeck, London).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.035 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".